“Amnesty” and its related “Guest Worker Program” are the Government and MSM solutions for what to do with the illegal aliens that are in this country.
It is worth noting that usually a “Guest Worker Program” is
often nothing more than “amnesty” by another name and as detailed in the JOBS
section, the “guest workers” are not just for picking lettuce.
Besides the fact that neither an “Amnesty” nor a “Guest Worker” program would correct any of
the collateral damage from the dark aspects of illegal immigration that are
detailed in this report, we all know that rewarding bad behavior only
encourages more of it. This is just
more common sense that the President and Congress seem to lack.
Unfortunately the problem of even recognizing
there is a problem starts at the top as noted in White
House compares illegal immigration to speeding. Is it any wonder that amnesty is proposed? And I’ll bet they are totally clueless to
the amount of collateral damage being caused by speeding, drunk driving,
illegal aliens.
In case you are not aware of it, Congress has passed 7 amnesties for illegal aliens
starting with Reagan’s “one time” amnesty bill in 1986. By any measure, it can be
concluded that all were The amnesty program that tried and failed with the end results being that we have a far greater
illegal alien problem than before the amnesty programs!
As reported by Heather MacDonald in a recent article, Amnesty Lessons, Europe has found it out too. In any case, amnesty is very unfair to the hopeful millions who are on the waiting list, following the rules, and the many more millions who would like to come to the USA but who don’t happen to live near or have access to the porous southern border. In fact it could be argued that allowing amnesty for the illegal Hispanic aliens is discrimination against non-Hispanics who want to come too.
In discussing amnesty it is worth noting that when
President Bush and most members of Congress, talk about “guest worker programs”
they are basically talking about a “blanket amnesty” program – the same thing
that was been done in the past, proven to be unworkable, and a great
contributor to the existing problem.
Nothing changes when they throw a piddling penalty payment into the mix.
How many government programs have you known of where the
name is not actually representative of and often opposite to the real intent of
the program?
In any case, why do the Government’s programs fail? Probably because they don’t really believe
the problem is serious which results in not making the tough and politically
incorrect decisions that would involve securing the border and denying
sanctuary to illegal aliens. If not
that then we start getting into more serious motivations such as they are all
nothing more than career politicians pandering to whatever crowd that will get
them re-elected and the good of the country be damned. That would actually be an improvement on the
Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) motivations, a topic
discussed a bit further down in this report, where they are basically selling
out this country.
Regardless, as detailed in this report, the collateral
damage being inflicted by our toleration of illegal immigration is very serious
and is growing. More and more Americans
are being ripped off, infected, molested, raped, killed, and murdered every day
and basically little is being done about it.
As noted multiple times in this report, NOBODY is keeping
track of the collateral damage inflicted on America by illegal aliens. Unfortunately, you can not rely on the MSM
to report the facts and the government is basically lying about and/or
concealing the problem.
When the government does look into the illegal immigration
problem and doesn’t like what they find they ignore their own findings and keep
the results from the American people.
As an example, a Judicial Watch Special Report, U.S.
Border Patrol Survey Analysis - Detailing the U.S. Government’s Polling
of Apprehended Illegal Immigrants, on the Southern Border in January 2004,
reports:
“Executive
Summary
President
Bush’s “temporary guest worker” proposal of January 7, 2004 was broadly
interpreted as an illegal immigration amnesty program around the country and
abroad. The Bush administration ordered
the U.S. Border Patrol to survey apprehended illegal immigrants concerning
President Bush’s proposal. The results
indicated that President Bush’s proposal had actually lured greater numbers of
illegal immigrants to violate the law.
Politically inconvenient and/or potentially embarrassing data from the
Border Patrol survey resulted in the Bush administration calling off the survey
on January 27, 2004. The U.S.
government never released a report based on the survey.
The White House
directed Homeland Security Public Affairs Officers to deliberately withhold
information from the public and the media about the Border Patrol survey and a
related spike in illegal immigration.
The Bush administration mislead Americans for political purposes. The White House approved talking points
included:
·
Do not talk about amnesty,
increase in apprehensions, or give comparisons of past immigration reform
proposals.
·
Do not provide statistics on
apprehension spikes or past amnesty data.
While the
Border Patrol’s unscientific survey and its aborted execution may not provide a
comprehensive picture of the relationship between President Bush’s immigration
proposal and illegal immigration, the initial data is deeply disturbing. Analysis of the raw data from the survey
forms indicates:
·
45% crossed illegally based
on rumors of a Bush administration amnesty.
·
63% received Mexican government
or media information supporting the notion of a Bush administration amnesty.
·
64% previously entered the
United States illegally.
·
80% desired to apply for
amnesty.
·
66% desired to petition for
family members to join them in the U.S.
Conclusions
“President
Bush’s proposed “temporary worker program” was broadly interpreted as an
amnesty offer to illegal immigrants. A
spike in illegal immigration following President Bush’s speech was surveyed as
a priority intelligence requirement for a three-week period by the Border
Patrol. Survey results were politically
unfavorable to the Bush administration, who ordered the survey stopped. The White House directed public affairs officers
to withhold information in order to mislead the public and stave off potential
political embarrassment. The government
only produced records material to the survey once Judicial Watch filed a FOIA
lawsuit in federal court. The
government continues to withhold additional records concerning this
matter. Judicial Watch will continue to
pursue this case and other illegal immigration matters, and report facts to the
American people, as part of its mission as a public interest education
foundation.”
While this paper will not attempt to analyze any proposed
government “amnesty” or “guest worker” programs, keep in mind that the devil is
in the details, and while Congress and the President talk, or don’t talk as the
case may be, the illegal flow keeps gushing in.
The President’s solution is basically Senate Bill S.2611
which would grant blanket amnesty to all illegal aliens currently in the
USA. The government and illegal alien
friendly groups such as the Pew Hispanic Center say that is 10-12 million
people. As this report details the
number is probably double that amount and could be three times as high. Additionally, the bill would grant 1 million
migrant workers green cards. To see the
traitors, I mean Senators who voted for this sell out see S.2611.
Given all the associated costs detailed in this report,
don’t you think a rational person would want to know how many illegal aliens
they were granting amnesty to before they granted amnesty? Of course since they aren’t paying for it, I
guess that isn’t important. At last
once the illegal aliens who are molesting, raping, killing and murdering
Americans are made into Americans the government can no longer be embarrassed
by the fact that they are not counting the crimes being committed by foreign
nationals on US soil. I suppose that is
one way to take care of the problem: change all the illegal alien, foreign
national criminals into resident American criminals.
The faucet is broken and water is squirting up like Old
Faithful and our elected officials just look at each other and want to talk
about how good the water running out the door is for the grass. It is time for the nation to rise up and say
“Turn the water off and clean up the mess!”
When you hear the President and Congress talking about
solving the “problem” with the President’s “guest worker” program, i.e. MORE
GUEST WORKERS, ask yourself, and Congress, how that will stop illegal aliens
from coming across the border?
How will more guest workers fix the problem of a very high
percentage of even the existing guest workers not leaving when their current
temporary work visas expire?
How will more guest workers reduce the unacceptable numbers
of Americans that are currently being molested, raped, killed, and murdered by
guest workers?
How will a larger guest worker program stop terrorist
sneaking across the border who want to murder as many American school children
as they can?
How will a bigger guest worker program prevent terrorist
from smuggling a nuke across the porous southern border?
Remember, as it is now, the government does not even track
crimes by foreign nationals, i.e. illegal aliens, or guest workers. More illegal alien criminals becoming “guest
workers” will only result in the unintended consequences of more collateral
damage – something we already have too much of.
As recently noted by Congressman King in a Washington Post
article, The
attrition solution:
“I emphatically disagree with
statements Sen. Mel Martinez made recently to the Washington Times ("New
RNC chief backs bill with guest-worker plan" Page 1, Feb. 2). Mr. Martinez
wants to grant illegal aliens a "path to citizenship." This represents nothing less than
endorsement of a mass amnesty for many millions of illegal aliens. Americans
reject mass amnesty by large margins.
Amnesty is an affront to native-born Americans, to legal immigrants, and
to the very concept of the rule of law.
Amnesty can be dressed up as "earned
legalization," "going to the back of the line" or a "path
to citizenship," but it is still amnesty.
Do we give bank robbers "earned plunder" or make them "go
to the end of the line" to get their pillage or a "path towards
keeping their prize"? Consider two
brothers living in Mexico City. One
came to the United States illegally.
The other stayed in Mexico and supports his family there. Mr. Martinez would grant the brother who
broke our laws permanent residence and then citizenship in our country. He would grant no such prizes to the brother
who stayed in Mexico. This is the worst
kind of amnesty -- it grants huge benefits that are reserved only for those who
have broken our laws.
Amnesty will not, as advertised, increase national security;
it will imperil us all. Some argue that
if we grant amnesty we will at least know "who is in our
country." They are fundamentally
mistaken. We will not learn who the illegal immigrants are, but who they want
us to believe they are. Aliens who want to create false identities will provide
counterfeit or fraudulent documents from their "home country" and we
will catch only those unlucky few whose can't afford quality fakes or who have
fingerprints in the FBI system. There
was a massive number of fraudulent applications filed for the 1986
amnesty. An estimated two-thirds of the
applications for amnesty for agricultural workers were fraudulent and most of
those fraudulent applications were approved.
As retired INS
investigator Mike Cutler has testified before the Immigration, Border Security
and Claims Subcommittee, "it will be a simple matter for illegal aliens,
including terrorists or criminals, to walk into an immigration office, along
with millions of other illegal aliens, and produce a false name and then get an
official identity document from our government bureaucrats. These documents would then enable them to
circumvent the various no-fly and terror watch lists. They would be able to use these documents as breeder documents –
all the while staying under the radar and obscuring and concealing their true
identity."
Mahmud
Abouhalima, a leader of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, was legalized
under the 1986 amnesty. It was only
after he got his amnesty that he was able to travel outside of the country,
including several trips to the Afghanistan/Pakistan border, where he received
the terrorist training he used in the bombing.
Three-quarters of Americans have little or no confidence in the
government's ability to weed out terrorists and criminals from the millions who
would apply for amnesty.
Mr. Martinez
presents the false choice of mass amnesty or mass deportations. The sensible middle ground -- supported by
Americans over amnesty by more than two to one -- is a policy of attrition. Vigorous enforcement of our current
immigration laws will substantially decrease the illegal-immigrant population
over time. Experience has proven that
illegal immigrants who could no longer easily obtain jobs would simply return
to their home countries. The Center for Immigration Studies has concluded that
a policy of vigorous enforcement would cut the illegal immigrant population in
half in just five years.”
If you want to find out the real scoop about the
government’s “amnesty” and “guest worker” programs contact the Congressional Immigration
Reform Caucus.
Regardless, it is time for the voters to ask the
politicians proposing amnesty and expanded guest worker programs:
In
granting amnesty, exactly how many Americans are YOU are willing to allow to be
infected, molested, raped, killed, and murdered by illegal aliens to save ten
cents on a head of lettuce?
NAU & SPP
In doing this report, I came across
and learned about all sorts of things that I was never aware of.
Two are the North American Union (NAU) and the Security
and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP).
Never heard of them?
Neither had I until I started this paper.
After doing some research on it, I believe they are
important enough to mention. I didn’t
really have a place to put it but since they very well could be the darkest
aspect of illegal immigration and are basically the mother of all amnesty programs I put this section here.
Note that most in the Govt, and MSM, and even many in the
alternative media, dismiss the existence of
both or, when they do acknowledge them, they refer to them as “study groups”
for one thing or another. While it
sounds like “Black helicopter” and “conspiracy theory” stuff, the axiom of
“Where there is smoke there is fire” usually has an element of truth. Having spent a number of hours following
various facets and seemingly unrelated and benign aspects and then connecting
the dots, I fear that the NAU and SPP are a gathering storm and could
ultimately end up causing far more damage than illegal immigration.
In fact the NAU and SPP, or
the spirit behind them, may be the reason behind why so little is being
done about illegal immigration.
The following are a few
salient comments about the NAU and SPP.
If you are a worker for a US manufacturer, a longshoreman or a truck
driver you might want to pay real close attention. As often the case, the devil is in the details:
The first thing to establish
is that the movements are real. For
that see Judicial Watch Releases
Pentagon Records from “North American Forum” Meetings - Defense Secretary, Senior Military
and Staff Met with Mexican & Canadian Officials over “Continental
Prosperity in the New Security Environment” which notes:
(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates
and prosecutes government corruption, today released documents obtained
November 2006 under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
from U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM). The documents concern the
participation of NORTHCOM Commander, Admiral Timothy Keating, NORTHCOM
Political Advisor Deborah Bolton, and Plans, Policy & Strategy Director
Major General Mark Volcheff in a meeting of the “North American Forum” at the
Banff Springs Hotel in Banff, Canada on September 12-14, 2006. A similar
request for records concerning forum participation by then-Defense Secretary
Rumsfeld and his entourage is still pending with the Pentagon.
The records include: 1)
Proposed comments for Admiral Keating’s speech to the North American Forum; 2)
Presentation outlines with handwritten marginal notes and comments from Ms.
Bolton; 3) Policy papers; 4) Biographic sketches of participants; and, 5) Notes
from Major General Volcheff.
The North American Forum
presentations discussed immigration and border enforcement; full economic and
energy integration including infrastructure and transportation; a North
American investment fund; and common customs and duties. The idea of a
carbon tax was raised as a means to combat so-called global warming. References
to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) occur throughout the
documents.
The notes for the
presentations document the need to overcome popular opposition to North
American integration: “To what degree does a concept of North America
help/hinder solving problems between the three countries?…While a vision is
appealing working on the infrastructure might yield more benefit and bring more
people on board (‘evolution by stealth’).”
For some additional
information, see:
A North American
United Nations? by Rep. Ron Paul,
of Texas on 8-30-06:
“According to the U.S.
government website dedicated to the project, the SPP is neither a treaty nor a
formal agreement. Rather , it is a
'dialogue' launched by the heads of state of Canada, Mexico, and the United
States at a summit in Waco, Texas in March, 2005. What is a 'dialogue'? We don't know. What we do know, however, is that Congressional oversight of what
might be one of the most significant developments in recent history is
non-existent. Congress has had no role
at all in a 'dialogue' that many see as a plan for a North American union. According to the SPP website, this
'dialogue' will create new supra-national organizations to 'coordinate' border
security, health policy, economic and trade policy, and energy policy between
the governments of Mexico, Canada, and the United States. As such, it is but an extension of NAFTA-
and CAFTA-like agreements that have far less to do with the free movement of
goods and services than they do with government coordination and management of
international trade. . . ."
Bush
Administration Erases U.S. Borders With Mexico and Canada, by Jerome Corsi, Human Events,
6-28-06 where it was reported:
“The Security and Prosperity
Partnership (SPP), signed by President Bush with Mexico and Canada in Waco,
Tex., on March 23, 2005, was fundamentally an agreement to erase our borders
with Mexico and Canada.
As I have documented below,
the SPP “working groups” organized within the U.S. Department of Transportation
are signing trilateral memoranda of understanding and other
agreements with Mexico and Canada designed to accomplish the open borders
goal incrementally, below the radar of mainstream media attention, thereby
avoiding public scrutiny. Congress is largely unaware that SPP exists, let
alone knowledgeable about the extensive work being done behind the scenes by
the executive branch to advance the agenda articulated by the Council on Foreign
Relations (CFR) to establish a North American Union as a new regional
super-government by 2010.
…The SPP working groups'
organized within the U.S. Department of Transportation are signing trilateral
memoranda of understanding and other agreements with Mexico and Canada designed
to accomplish the open borders goal incrementally, below the radar of
mainstream media attention, thereby avoiding public scrutiny. Congress is largely unaware that SPP
exists.
… Also found in the June
2005 “Report to Leaders” is that the SPP
working groups organized in DOC are reporting to three U.S. cabinet secretaries:
Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez, Secretary of Homeland Security Michael
Chertoff, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Comparable cabinet-level working groups are referenced to government
websites in Canada and in Mexico.
More than 20 working groups
are identified in the June 2005 “Report to Leaders” and decisions have been
made to open U.S. borders and skies to virtually unlimited “migration” and
trade from Canada and Mexico.”
WorldNetDaily,
9-26-06.
Government documents
released by a Freedom of Information Act request reveal the Bush administration
is running a 'shadow government' with Mexico and Canada in which the U.S. is
crafting a broad range of policy in conjunction with its neighbors to the north
and south….The documents clearly reveal the SPP, working within the U.S.
Department of Commerce, is far advanced in putting together a new regional
infrastructure, creating a 'shadow' trilateral bureaucracy with Mexico and
Canada that is aggressively rewriting a wide range of U.S. administrative law,
all without congressional oversight or public disclosure."
North American Union
Escapes Scrutiny, by Tom Fitton, President of Judicial Watch:
"Judicial Watch
uncovered documents that shed new light on the 'Security and Prosperity
Partnership of North America,' announced by President Bush, former Mexico
President Vicente Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin on March 23,
2005. The expressed goal of the
partnership is to create 'a safer, more prosperous North America' through
enhanced cooperation….Critics, however, charge that it is a veiled attempt to
erase the borders between the countries, creating a 'North American Union' much
like the European Union, with a common currency…”
The NAFTA
Superhighway, by Representative Ron
Paul of Texas:
“…The proposed
highway is part of a broader plan advanced by a quasi-government organization
called the “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America,” or SPP.
The SPP was
first launched in 2005 by the heads of state of Canada, Mexico, and the United
States at a summit in Waco.
The SPP was not
created by a treaty between the nations involved, nor was Congress involved in
any way. Instead, the SPP is an unholy
alliance of foreign consortiums and officials from several governments. One principal player is a Spanish
construction company, which plans to build the highway and operate it as a toll
road. But don’t be fooled: the
superhighway proposal is not the result of free market demand, but rather an
extension of government-managed trade schemes like NAFTA that benefit
politically-connected interests.
The real issue
is national sovereignty. Once again,
decisions that affect millions of Americans are not being made by those
Americans themselves, or even by their elected representatives in Congress. Instead, a handful of elites use their
government connections to bypass national legislatures and ignore our
Constitution-- which expressly grants Congress the sole authority to regulate
international trade.
The ultimate
goal is not simply a superhighway, but an integrated North American Union--complete
with a currency, a cross-national bureaucracy, and virtually borderless travel
within the Union. Like the European
Union, a North American Union would represent another step toward the abolition
of national sovereignty altogether.
North American Union
Already Starting to Replace USA, by Jerome Corsi:
"In every area of
activity, the SPP agenda stresses free and open movement of people, trade, and capital
within the North American Union. Once
the SPP agenda is implemented with appropriate departmental regulations, there
will be no area of immigration policy, trade rules, environmental regulations,
capital flows, public health, plus dozens of other key policy areas that the
U.S. government will be able to decide alone, or without first consulting with
some appropriate North American Union regulatory body. At best, our border with Mexico will become
a speed bump, largely erased, with little remaining to restrict the essentially
free movement of people, trade, and capital."
“From an industry
perspective, NASCO is one of the organizations supporting various north-south
corridors identified to facilitate NAFTA trade. NASCO has absorbed the former
North American International Trade Corridor Partnership, a non-profit group
organized in Mexico with similar goals of internationalizing U.S. highways into
a NAFTA structure to facilitate trade with Mexico and Canada. The North
American Inland Port Network (NAIPN) is also listed as a NASCO partner. NAIPN
functions as a NASCO sub-committee to develop “inland ports” along the highway
corridors “to specifically alleviate congestion at maritime ports and our
nation’s borders.”
…According to the 4,000-page draft environmental impact statement, the plan
is to build a 4,000-mile network of new super-highways that will be “up to
1,200 feet wide (at full build-out) with separate lanes for passenger vehicles
(three in each direction) and trucks (two in each direction), six rail lines
(separate lines in each direction for high-speed rail, commuter rail, and
freight rail), and a 200-foot wide utility corridor.”
Controversy Erupts Over
NASCO and the NAFTA Super-Highway, by Jerome Corsi:
“On March 11, 2005, TxDOT signed a definitive agreement with Cintra Zachry, a
limited partnership formed by Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructures de
Transport in Spain and the San Antonio-based Zachry Construction Co. “to
develop the Oklahoma to Mexico/Gulf Coast element of the Trans-Texas Corridor
(TTC-35). This agreement calls for the Cintra-Zachry limited partnership to pay Texas
$1.2 billion “for the long-term right to build and operate the initial
segment as a toll facility.” The
initial TTC-35 segment is scheduled to be built roughly parallel to I-35
between Dallas and San Antonio. The
final public hearings are scheduled in Texas for July and August. While construction contracts have yet to be
finalized, Cintra-Zachry presumably holds those rights as a result of the $1.2 billion
payment to Texas, as described in the March 11, 2005, contract. The timeline published on the Trans-Texas Corridor website
envisions final federal approval by the summer of 2007, with the construction
of the first TTC-35 segment to follow immediately afterward.
The plan to create a
North American Union as a regional government in 2010 is directly stated only
in the May 2005 task force report, “Building a North American Community.” Still, we must examine how the Security and Prosperity Partnership signed by President
Bush with Mexico and Canada in Waco, Tex., on March 23, 2005, is being
implemented. We find that government offices such as the Security and
Prosperity Partnership working groups being organized within the U.S. Department
of Commerce are signing trilateral memoranda of understanding and other
agreements with Mexico and Canada consistent with the goal of fulfilling the
CFR’s dream to bring about a North American Union by 2010.”
Point of View, Commentary
by Kerby Anderson, 10-20-06:
The Texas segment (known as
the Trans-Texas Corridor) will begin construction next year….In April 2006,
TxDOT released a 4000-page Environmental Impact Statement that describes a
corridor that will be 1200 feet wide (the size of four football fields). It will parallel Interstate 35, and be five
lanes north and five lanes south (3 cars, 2 trucks). In the middle will be pipelines and rail lines. It will also have a 200-foot wide utility
corridor. The corridor will start in
Laredo, Texas, run past Austin to the Texas-Oklahoma border. However, the plans ultimately call for
building some 4,000 miles of highway-railway-utility super-corridors throughout
Texas over the next 50 years, using some 584,000 acres of what is now Texas
farm and ranchland, at an estimated cost of $184 billion….This NAFTA
superhighway will connect with ports in Mexico (specifically Manzanillo and
Lazaro Cardenas) for NAFTA trade. The
plan is to ship containers of cheap goods produced by under-market labor in
China and the Far East into North America via Mexican ports. From the Mexican ports, Mexican truck
drivers and railroad workers will transport the goods across the Mexican border
with Texas. Once in the U.S., the
routes will proceed north to Kansas City along the NAFTA Super-Highway, ready
to be expanded by the Trans-Texas Corridor and NAFTA railroad routes being put
in place by Kansas City Southern."
Jerome
Corsi, Human Events, 6-26-06:
"What is NASCO? It is a non-profit 501(c)(6) organization
that functions as a trade association and sometimes lobbying group for the
public and private entities that are members. NASCO is an acronym for North America's
SuperCorridor Coalition….According to the groups' website, NASCO is 'dedicated to
developing the world's first international, integrated and secure, multi-modal
transportation system along the International Mid-Continent Trade and
Transportation Corridor.'….The city of Kansas City, Mo, and the Kansas City
SmartPort are both listed on the NASCO website as NASCO members. The Kansas
City Area Development Council has directly confirmed that the Kansas City
SmartPort intends to build a Mexican customs facility to facilitate out-going
traffic headed to Mexico….The Kansas City SmartPort brochure could not be more
explicit: 'Kansas City offers the opportunity for sealed cargo containers to
travel to Mexican port cities with virtually no border delays. It will streamline shipments from
Asia.'"
Kansas City Star, 7-18-06:
"This
spring, city officials signed off on a 50-year lease for the Mexican facility,
with an option for 50 more years. . . . The council earlier this year earmarked
$2.5 million in loans and $600,000 in direct aid to SmartPort, which would
build and own the inland customs facility and sublet it to the Mexican
government through agreements with U.S. Customs and Border Protection….The
Mexican government would have no significant investment and would occupy the
customs facility operation rent-free….SmartPort set up the deal to avoid
imposing any expenses on Mexico above its ordinary border costs….SmartPort
meanwhile is seeking a $1.5 million grant from the U.S. Economic Development
Administration to purchase high-tech gamma-ray screening devices for
drive-through inspections of truck cargo…..Confusion and secrecy have been
hallmarks of the ambitious project. At
the outset, Gutierrez and others have said the customs facility would be
sovereign Mexican soil similar to a foreign embassy. This has changed."
Here is report from Accuracy in Media worth reading: U.S. Borders:
Going-Going-Gone! Also see House
Resolution 487. The NAU and SPP are
scary stuff – even if only partly true.
Did the proposed new North American currency, the “Amero”
make your paper? No? Read about it here: London
stock trader urges move to 'amero' - Says many unaware of plan to replace
dollar with N. American currency. With the continuing devaluation and looming collapse
of the dollar it might be a done deal.
For more information on the NAU and SPP, Borderless
Continent and Stop
SPP are good places to start. Go to
Stop the North American Union and Treason Abounds to really get into it.
Regardless
of the NAU and SPP, illegal immigration is a big problem now.
PLAN TO DESTROY AMERICA
When contemplating the issue of illegal immigration and
what to do about it, here is the transcript of a speech given by
ex-Colorado Governor Dick Lamn at a population conference in Washington DC in
2004 to consider:
I Have a Plan to Destroy
America
I have a secret plan to destroy America. If you believe, as many do, that America is
too smug, too white bread, too self-satisfied, too rich, lets destroy
America. It is not that hard to
do. History shows that nations are more
fragile than their citizens think. No nation in history has survived the
ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee
observed that all great civilizations rise and they all fall, and that "an
autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide." here
is my plan:
1.
We must first make America a bilingual-bicultural country. History
shows, in my opinion, that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and
antagonism of two competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an
individual to be bilingual; it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. One scholar, Seymour Martin Lipset, put it
this way: The histories of bilingual and bicultural societies
that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy. Canada,
Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon ---- all face crises of national existence in which
minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have
divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic
rebellion. France faces difficulties with its Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans.
2.
I
would then invent "multiculturalism" and encourage immigrants to maintain
their own culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal: that
there are no cultural differences that are important. I would declare it an
article of faith that the Black and Hispanic dropout rate is only due to
prejudice and discrimination by the majority.
Every other explanation is out-of-bounds.
3. We
can make the United States a "Hispanic Quebec" without much
effort. The key is to celebrate
diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently:
...the apparent success of our own multiethnic and multicultural
experiment might have been achieved not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated
ethnocentrically, and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only
tolerance and pluralism to hold us together.
I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and
culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with a salad bowl
metaphor. It is important to insure
that we have various cultural sub-groups living in America reinforcing their
differences rather than Americans, emphasizing their similarities.
4. Having
done all this, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least
educated - I would add a second underclass, un-assimilated, undereducated, and
antagonistic to our population. I would have
this second underclass have a 50% drop out rate from school.
5. I
would then get the big foundations and big business to give these efforts lots
of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of
Victimology. I would get all minorities
to think their lack of success was all the fault of the majority - I would
start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority
population.
6. I would establish dual citizenship and promote divided
loyalties. I would "Celebrate
diversity." "Diversity” is a wonderfully seductive word. It stresses differences rather than
commonalities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each
other-that is, when they are not killing each other. A diverse,” peaceful, or
stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the
unity it takes to keep a nation together, and we can take advantage of this
myopia. Look at the ancient
Greeks. Dorf ’s world history tells us:
The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they
possessed a common language and literature; and they worshiped the same
gods. All Greece took part in the
Olympic Games in honor of Zeus and all Greeks venerated the shrine of Apollo at
Delphi. A common enemy Persia
threatened their liberty. Yet, all of
these bonds together were not strong enough to overcome two factors . . .
(local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions
. . .)
If we can put the emphasis on the “pluribus,” instead of the
“unum,” we can balkanize America as surely as Kosovo.
7. Then I would place all these
subjects off limits - make it taboo to talk about. I would find a word similar to “heretic” in the 16th century - that
stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking.
Words like “racist”, “xenophobe” that halts argument and
conversation. Having made america a
bilingual-bicultural country, having established multiculturalism, having the
large foundations fund the doctrine of “Victimology,” I would next make it
impossible to enforce our immigration laws.
I would develop a mantra - “that because immigration has been good for
America, it must always be good.” I would
make every individual immigrant sympatric and ignore the cumulative impact.
8. Lastly,
I would censor Victor Davis Hanson’s book “Mexifornia.” This book is dangerous — it exposes my plan to destroy
America. So please, please — if you
feel that America deserves to be destroyed - please, please - don’t buy this
book! This guy is on to my plan.
“The smart way to keep
people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the Spectrum of acceptable
opinion, but allow very lively debate within that Spectrum.” - Noam Chomsky,
American linguist and US Media and Foreign Policy critic.
It sounds like Dick Lamn hit the nail on the
head.
However, the question we need to be asking ourselves
and members of Congress is:
Why
is the plan to destroy America being implemented?
As detailed throughout the previous sections of this
report, much of the problem of illegal aliens is a direct consequence of little
to no border security. If nothing else,
proper border security would prevent all the “previously deported” illegal aliens from simply returning and
committing more of the collateral damage.
Remember, some estimates put previously
deported illegal aliens as being responsible for 60-65% of many of the
crimes. Just eliminating that would be
worth the expense.
If closing the borders and enforcing immigration laws are
not important to you then I would suggest you go get the movies United
93, True Lies, and The Peacemaker from Blockbuster or
NetFlix. In these movies Hollywood
actually got it right, and is almost prophetic in True Lies. Then read Osama's
exploits south of border -AlQaida in league with Mexican radicals in plot to
penetrate U.S., says MI6 report and No place
to run and consider some of the
more serious consequences of open borders in a post 9/11 world.
If you still need some convincing, go back up to the
TERRORISM, VIOLENT CRIMES, SEXUAL CRIMES, GANG CRIMES, and DISEASES
sections and start clicking on the references and links. If you are a “bottom line” person go to the
SUMMARY of COLLATERAL DAMAGE section and start adding up how much tolerating
illegal immigration is costing you and your family.
As this paper has documented, the borders are very porous
and any meaningful border security is basically non-existent across much of our
borders making it a fairly simple process to break into the United States. Millions of peasants are doing it now. How tough do you think it is for trained
terrorists?
In a speech by Secretary of the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) Michael Chertoff on September 11, 2006, Five
Years Later, he stated “Our number one defense against terror involves
the perimeter, keeping dangerous enemies from entering the United States of
America.”
While DHS and Immigration Customs Enforcement
(ICE) are doing a better job, by that admission we are in big trouble.
How bad are we actually doing and what is the current
risk? See The
Five Years War: Public Safety versus Special Interest for some rather discouraging insight.
Currently, millions of illegal immigrants are simply
strolling across the borders and into the United States. This paper has documented the massive
collateral damage being inflicted on the American people and society by our
“open border” policies and tolerance of this illegal activity.
The President and Congress take an oath to uphold and
defend the Constitution. Allowing
illegal aliens to wantonly defy our borders and laws is an abrogation of
responsibility.
Hopefully, it won’t take the NY or Washington DC subway
system being contaminated with a nuclear or biological agent or Dallas,
Phoenix, LA, NYC, or Washington DC going up in a mushroom cloud before our
Government starts taking their responsibilities seriously and secures the
border.
Maybe if the politicians who are responsible for securing
the border and ensuring domestic tranquility thought Bin Laden planned on
nuking Washington DC while Congress was in session, they might just start
taking their responsibilities seriously.
If not and if it actually happens, we can re-elect
politicians who finally will.
Regardless, border security starts with having secure
borders where we can know and control who is coming into the United States.
As illustrated by the pictures above, there is little to no
physical border security along much of the United States’ international
borders. This has allowed illegal
immigrants, including terrorists, to simply stroll across the border to gain
access to the United States.
A significant improvement in the situation in part of San
Diego area was made with the construction of the 14 mile San Diego dual fence,
as shown below.
Contrast
this border fence with the pictures of actual parts of the border in the
paragraphs above.
What were the results of installing some serious physical
border security in San Diego?
Upon completion of the “San Diego Primary Fence,” it quickly reduced apprehensions at the Imperial Beach Station by about 80% with similar reductions noted at the Chula Vista station. However, apprehensions at other nearby stations doubled as much of the illegal immigration simply went around the fence. It was only when additional enforcement measures,
manly manpower and detection support equipment, was added did traffic
at those stations decline, although not as significantly as that achieved with
better fences.
However,
just like when you squeeze a water balloon in one place it bulges out in
another, so the illegal alien traffic simply went other places, as noted in the
following chart:
Pictures &
graphs from CRS Report - Border
Security: Barriers Along the US International Border
As proposed by We
Need a Fence, and similar to the “three fence barrier” recommendations made
by Sandia Laboratories in the CRS Report, maybe this is the kind of border
security we need, although without the barbed wire roll on the southern side to
be “politically correct”:
In any case,
acoustic listening devices would need to be embedded in the road in all areas
with infrastructure on the Mexican side of the fence to detect for tunneling
under the fence.
Similar border security fences in Israel have reduced terrorist attacks by up to 95%. Applied uniformly on the southern border, they would reduce the border transgressions of the common illegal alien even more and catch a similarly high percentage of “the really bad” border crossers. For details on the proper way to have border security, see Israel’s Security Fence.
Why do we need such a formidable border fence? Because illegal alien criminals, gang members and potential terrorists are simply waltzing across the unmanned and/or lightly patrolled portions of the border. Furthermore, as this paper has detailed, and again as recently noted in Mecklenburg jailers find over 900 illegal immigrants since April, a high percentage of the ones that are deported simply come back in. 68 of 128 (53%) in this case, prompting Sgt. Daniel Stitt to comment, "We didn't realize it would be to this magnitude.”
Although NOBODY that I am aware of is studying it, but as some of the studies referenced in this report would seem to indicate, I would bet that the deported recidivist illegal alien criminals have a higher rate of returning than the average “only doing the work Americans won’t do” deported illegal alien. While I do not know what the record is, as referenced earlier in this report, one illegal alien criminal had been previously deported SEVENTEEN times. How much manpower and enforcement costs were expended on just that one illegal alien?
Part of the reason that deported illegal aliens return is because many that are deported are hard core criminals and, as the notorious bank robber Willy Sutton is reported to have once said, “That is where the money is.” Like a bad penny, many keep showing up again and again because nothing prevents it from happening.
As noted in the previous paragraphs, while the two fence,
Sandia/SanDiego border fence dramatically reduced overall illegal crossings of
the border where the fence was installed, it did not completely eliminate
it. A notable portion of the more
dedicated illegal aliens still made it across.
What category do you suppose career criminals, gang members, and
terrorists would be in? Remember, when
an illegal alien criminal or sexual pervert makes it across the border and
attacks you or your family it will be too late to build the fence. When terrorists smuggle a nuke across the
border and vaporize your city it will be too late to FINALLY start building
proper border security.
If we started today, proper physical border security along
the 1,951 mile long US-Mexico border
will take a few years to build, even if we only built the 850 or so currently
identified “critical miles.” In the
meantime, the illegal flow keeps gushing in.
Once the decision to build the fence is made and publicized, a “last
chance” stampede will start. To stop
the existing flow and mitigate the surge before the fence is finished we must
immediately and dramatically increase the physical presence of the INS on the
border.
Since the vastly increased manpower requirement will only
be temporary until the fence is built, this should be accomplished through the
use of National Guard and/or military units with “shoot to kill” authorization
when attacked. The latter might take
changes in existing law but may need to be done to combat the foreign invasion. This action must be taken now. Each day we delay results in another few
thousand illegal aliens entering the country, including gang members, hard core
criminals, drug smugglers, sexual predators, and terrorists.
But you say, “I thought we started building a border
fence!” Not so. Passing the Secure Fence Act to build much more fencing and funding the actual building
of the complete fence are two different things. You know, a Congressional “show” that something is being
done. For more information on that, see
Vincent Gioia’s October 2006
commentary, The
Mexican Border Fence Hoax.
As this paper has detailed, there are currently hundreds of
thousands of criminal illegal aliens roaming the streets committing mayhem on
US citizens. Many were previously deported, often multiple
times, and they simply walked back in.
Without such a formidable barrier the Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE) is woefully undermanned to enforce border security. As noted in the aforementioned CRS report, a
fence is a “force multiplier.”
If you are still not convinced that we need some serious
physical border security, go back up to the CRIMINAL sections and start
clicking on the links or go to the ICE Public Information
News Releases and start perusing the press releases. Remember, until finally caught, the illegal
alien criminals were in your city and neighborhood and the ones caught are only
a small portion of the criminal illegal aliens still out there, with more
pouring across each day.
In 2005 illegal alien criminals committed at least 1,172,036 crimes. The actual number may be three to five times
as high. You can expect as many crimes
in 2007. While some of the perpetrators
were in the USA as a result of visa violations, at least 60% of those crimes
are a direct result of no border security allowing previously deported illegal aliens to come right back in. When you or your family are crime victims it
will be too late to build the fence.
It is also worth noting that a humane side affect of having
robust border security barrier is that it will eliminate all the deaths from
illegal aliens dying in the desert as they try to sneak across some rather
inhospitable areas of the SW border.
See: 460
border crossers died in past year.
Posters on fence tell of 3,600 found dead in 11 years. That would make
the fence “The Friendship Fence” as in friends don’t let illegal aliens sneak
across the border and die in the desert.
The December 2006
report from the Congressional Research Service, Border Security:
Barriers Along the US International Border, provides some costing for the
fencing. The report notes that, excluding the costs of land acquisition, the Army Corp of
Engineers estimates that the double layer Sandia type fence like what was
installed in San Diego would cost about $1.3 million per mile. The CBO estimates the construction costs to
be $3 million per mile.
The DHS constructed the 14 mile San Diego fence at a cost
of $127 million but some serious mitigating circumstances (environmental
assessments, legal appeals, lengthy delays, a big canyon, etc) over the last
4.5 miles heading to the Pacific soaked up $96 million of that meaning that the
first 9.5 miles cost $3.3 million a mile.
Averaging out the four estimates of 1.3, 2.8,
3.0 and 3.3 million per mile we get $2.7 million per mile. Thus 850 critical miles would cost $2.3 billion
and all 1,951 miles would cost $5.3 billion.
Given that a much longer fence construction project would cost notably
less on a per mile basis and the fact that much of the border is in flat,
barren, desert wastelands, the total costs should actually be much lower.
If one assumes an average of two border patrol agents per
mile, three shifts per day, with a 50% overhead for weekends, vacations,
supervision, et cetera, to patrol all 1951 miles you would need a staff of
17,559. At an average burdened cost of
$75,000 each that would be $1.3 billion per year. Maintenance and up-keep at $500,000 per mile would cost $976
million per year for a total operating cost of $2.3 billion per year. Since all 1,951 miles do not need such
serious fencing and patrolling, a lower number of miles would be proportionally
less. 850 miles, as an example, would
only cost about $1 billion a year to man and maintain.
However, as the results from the San Diego fence proved,
the illegal aliens will only go around any serious fencing meaning that all or
most of the 1,951 miles will eventually need to be secured.
As detailed earlier in this report, in 1980 there were only
9,000 incarcerated illegal alien criminals in federal, state, and local
facilities. In 2003 there were 267,000.
For the sake of argument, let us assume that there were no
increases of illegal alien prisoners from 1980 through 1986, when Reagan’s “one
time” amnesty bill was enacted, since it was supposed to stop the flow of
illegal aliens into the US. Let us also
assume that since 2003 there have been no more additional illegal alien
prisoners, since we just ignore the problem anyway, and that there was a linear
growth of the number of illegal aliens incarcerated from 1986 to through 2006. .
With all these “low ball” assumptions, that means we still
have had 2,709,000 more man years of illegal alien incarceration, over and
above the amount we would have had with only 9,000 incarcerated in 1986, when
we weren’t supposed to have any more.
At $25,000 per year incarceration costs that means we have already spent
$67.7 BILLION more on incarceration than we otherwise would have had, if we had
simply kept all the additional illegal alien criminals out - something Reagan’s
amnesty deal , with border security and enforcement provisions, was supposed to
have done. Unfortunately, our
Government went gung-ho on the “amnesty” part and neglected the “security and
enforcement” part of the “deal.”
Again, assuming no additional illegal alien prisoners,
something that is highly unlikely, the total incarceration costs are going up
by about $6.7 billion per year. That
number alone is greater than the cost of building, operating and maintaining a
fence today along the entire southern border.
So, as it turns out, not enforcing border security and
building the fence in the first place was penny wise and pound foolish –
something Congress seems to be very good at.
As this report has detailed, however, the yearly collateral
costs of illegal immigration do not stop at the incarceration costs and in fact
FAR EXCEEDS the cost of FINALLY building the fence and incorporating proper
border security.
As a reminder, besides the $6.7B yearly incarceration costs
the total yearly economic impact of illegal alien crime costs somewhere between
$14.4 and $50 billion or more and may be as high as $437 billion; accidents caused by illegal aliens cost at least $11.5
billion and probably 3-5 times as much; and the education costs for illegal
alien children is about $34.5 billion. Per year. Add in the costs for, welfare, social programs, medical costs, et
cetera and you have another $100 billion or so. PER YEAR.
Still think the fence “costs too much?”
While a fence would not do anything for the 267,000 or so
incarcerated illegal aliens that we currently have due to Presidential and
Congressional malfeasance, it would allow that number to decline as they
complete their sentences and are deported.
It would also dramatically reduce the number of crimes currently being
committed by illegal criminals as about 60% of the crimes committed by illegal
aliens are committed by illegal aliens that were previously deported.
It would also dramatically reduce the illegal alien
invasion.
The President and Congress are spending enormous amounts on
the collateral damage of tolerating illegal aliens but they won’t spend the
money to protect you from it happening in the first place.
We have spent hundreds of billions fighting terrorists in
Afghanistan and Iraq, with a loss of about 3,000 American soldiers with many
more being injured. Part of the reason
for this is that we would rather be fighting terrorist THERE than HERE. Yet, at the same time, we are tolerating the invasion on the southern border which has
resulted in far more Americans being injured and killed by illegal aliens HERE every
year than the TOTAL casualties and injuries fighting the war on terror
since 9/11, including the 2,752 Americans killed on 9/11.
Let me repeat: EVERY
YEAR. Let that sink in for a
moment.
Which gets the most press?
We send a carrier task force to the Persian Gulf in a
futile attempt to persuade nut-case terrorist states to behave. Yet for the cost of one carrier we could
build a fence along the entire southern border. For the yearly costs of just operating that carrier and its air
wing, let alone the accompanying task force, we could man and maintain that
fence.
How many Americans has Iran molested, raped, killed, and
murdered versus how many Americans have foreign nationals who came across the
southern border molested, raped, killed, and murdered?
What are our priorities?
So rather than demand Congress spend a paltry few billion
dollars out of a three trillion dollar budget:
Exactly
how many Americans are YOU willing to allow to be molested, raped, killed, and
murdered to tolerate illegal immigration?
Since the fence is nothing more than a cost-benefit
tradeoff:
What price do
YOU put on each child molested?
What price do
YOU put on each woman who is raped?
What price do
YOU put on each American that is killed?
What price do
YOU put on each American that is murdered?
What price do
YOU put on a US city being vaporized?
www.ongressandimmigration.com